4 ms·
Me too. What gave you that impression it would be a reasonable interpretation of what I posted, or are you just trolling?
by shzhdbi09gv8ioi 3y ago
Me too. What gave you that impression it would be a reasonable interpretation of what I posted, or are you just trolling?
- triyambakam 3y agoFrom your own quote: > They do have canines that are pointy enough to serve the purpose of tearing meat.
- shzhdbi09gv8ioi 3y agoYep, that is an observation. Humans do have canines. But I asked you, how do you end up turning the above statement about the modern human into: > I'd really like to see a human try to tear raw flesh off an animal with their canines. I am highly skeptical that would work at all. I didn't suggest humans walked around tearing off raw meat. However, our ancestors probably did at some point. Since our ancestors tamed the fire about 2 million years ago, we have started cooking using fire, which changed our anatomy.
- triyambakam 3y agoEarly hominins did not have physical adaptations like large canines or claws like carnivorous animals do. So how far back do we need to go? Gorillas have giant canines. They don't eat meat.
- triyambakam 3y agoIf that is not a reasonable interpretation then what are you trying to say? Humans are meant to eat meat but are physically incapable of performing the same actions that other meat eating animals can?
- shzhdbi09gv8ioi 3y agoSo being highly skeptical when pointed to mountains of evidence is the reasonable conclusion? Perhaps I just can't express myself. There is nothing controversial here, unless you are wildly disagreeing with evolution.